Details continue to emerge.

The Egyptian draft calls for the creation of a new Palestinian unity government. The Egyptian proposal also says that democracy is the only option for the principle of rotation of authority while respecting law and order and legitimacy, and it says that support for democracy requires political participation of all parties without quotas. Hamas has been asking for a share of seats in the Palestinian National Council that is proportional to the votes that it won in the last Palestinian Legislative Council elections in January 2006, when it beat Fatah in the balloting. The Egyptian proposal suggests a compromise on when to hold national elections, calling for simultaneous elections, but leaving the date open. It also proposes that the election law should be reviewed in accordance with the needs of the interest of the homeland. Fatah apparently wants both presidential and parliamentary elections to be held simultaneously in 2010 – with President Abbas apparently continuing in office until then. But Hamas says that Abbas’s term ends in January 2009, and has repeatedly said that it believes the present Palestinian Legislative Council must continue until the end of its term in January 2010. The Egyptian draft says the security apparatuses should be rebuilt on a professional and national basis away from factionalism, and that only the security apparatuses would be authorized to defend the homeland and the citizens, with “the required Arab assistance that is necessary to fulfill the process of building and reform”. And the Egyptian plan calls for the formation of committees to begin work immediately on all the proposals, saying that there is no restriction on an Arab participation in any of the committees upon the request of the organizations. The plan says the Palestine Liberation Organization should be re-activated according to a March 2005 Cairo agreement, to include all forces and factions. The Egyptian plan also calls for the election of a new Palestinian National Council “in the homeland and abroad, wherever it is possible”.

According to the proposed draft plan, the Palestinian political factions would agree that the management of the political negotiations is a prerogative of the PLO and the president of the PA. The plan says that any agreement resulting from these negotiations has to be presented before the Palestinian National Council for approval — or a referendum should be conducted “anywhere possible”.

This draft agreement seems to leave a lot of loopholes open – and seems to steer the reconciliation talks in the direction of having all the Palestinian parties conform with the Road Map and the desires of the Quartet of Middle East negotiators. Hamas has apparently expressed reservations on a number of items of the draft conciliation proposal. Hamas Spokesperson Fawzi Barhoum told AFP that Hamas would request some changes, but that it would “agree to the draft of the agreement and will not reject it, but there needs to be guarantees that what is agreed upon will be implemented,” Hamas Spokesperson Fawzi Barhoum told AFP. Some points need to be modified and some points need clarification, Barhoum said.

While the Egyptian plan proposes a reform of the Palestinian security forces, the Palestinian newspaper Al-Quds reported that Hamas has demanded the banishment of four security leaders who, Hamas says, are acting on a factional basis and who are the executors of a policy of arrests against Hamas leaders in the West Bank. By coincidence, YNet said, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas also wants to replace two of them — Tawfik Tirawi, head of the PA General Intelligence Service in the West Bank, who would actually be promoted, and appointed Abbas’ special advisor on security affairs with the rank of minister, and Diab al-Ali, commander of the Palestinian security forces in the West Bank. However, YNet added, the PA is concerned the changes would be perceived as capitulation to Hamas.

Ma’an News Agency reported that Tirawi was in fact dismissed on Tuesday. Ramattan says that he was removed due to professional rivalries. But, Ma’an quoted its sources as denying what was published by local and international news websites about Abbas intention to appoint a new chief of national security in West Bank to replace Diab Al-Ali (Abu Al-Fatah).

Then, on Thursday, JPOST correspondent Khaled Abu Toameh wrote that “Fatah officials on Wednesday criticized Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas’s decision to dismiss Gen. Tawfik Tirawi, commander of the PA’s General Intelligence Service, noting that the timing was particularly ‘problematic’. Abbas summoned Tirawi late Tuesday night to a meeting in the Mukata ‘presidential’ compound and informed him of the decision to fire him. Abbas offered to appoint Tirawi as his ‘adviser’ on security affairs and to promote him to the status of minister. However, Tirawi said shortly after the meeting that he was not interested in the new job and that he plans to travel to the United Kingdom to study English”.

Khaled Abu Toameh also wrote that “Abbas’s decision to fire Tirawi is believed to be linked to the PA president’s desire to patch up his differences with Hamas. On the eve of the decision, Hamas officials said they had requested that Abbas get rid of Palestinian security commanders responsible for the massive crackdown on the movement’s members and institutions in the West Bank. Tirawi, along with several top PA security officials, had been entrusted by the PA leadership in Ramallah with taking precautionary measures to prevent Hamas from extending its control to the West Bank…A senior Hamas official in the Gaza Strip told The Jerusalem Post that his movement had indeed demanded that Abbas replace Tirawi and other PA security commanders in the West Bank to pave the way for ending the crisis with Fatah. ‘We welcome Abbas’s decision to fire Tirawi, who was responsible for security coordination with the Israelis and who was behind the brutal measures against Hamas [in the West Bank’, the official said. ‘We hope Abbas will take similar measures against all those security chiefs who chose to work with Israel and the Americans against our people’.” The official said his movement was now expecting Abbas to remove Diab al-Ali, commander of the PA’s National ecurity Force in the West Bank, who is also known as a sworn enemy of Hamas. Last month al-Ali raised eyebrows when he threatened that his forces would not hesitate to use force to overthrow the Hamas government in the Gaza Strip.

Fatah is very unhappy, according to Khaled Abu Toameh: ” ‘The timing of the decision to fire Tirawi was very bad’, a Fatah official in Ramallah told the Post. ‘It appears as if President Abbas took the decision to appease Hamas’. Another Fatah operative condemned Abbas’s decision as ‘dangerous’, claiming it would deepen divisions inside Fatah. ‘Many people in Fatah are unhappy with the decision’, he said. ‘They believe that Abbas made a huge mistake’. The Fatah official said he did not rule out the possibility that Abbas’s decision was linked to his desire to extend his term in office beyond January 2009. ‘Some are talking about a secret deal between Abbas and Hamas that allows him to remain in power after his term expires next January’, he said. ‘Hamas wants the heads of the security commanders in the West Bank in return for agreeing to the extension of Abbas’s term. This doesn’t look good’. A senior PA official denied the charges, saying the decision had nothing to do with Hamas’s demand for the dismissal of Tirawi and other commanders. The official said that the decision was taken because Tirawi had refused to report to the PA government of Salaam Fayad in the West Bank.
According to the official, the decision was taken in the context of the US-backed efforts to reform the PA security forces by reducing their number. He added that the proposed reforms call for merging Tirawi’s General Intelligence Service with the rival Preventative Security Force and turning them into a single force that reports directly to Fayad’s government”.
This analysis can be read in full in the Jerusalem Post
here

In this interview, Dr. Barghouti answers questions about the revival — at least in a limited role, at first — of the Palestine Legislative Council, and possible moves towards healing of the split between the West Bank and Gaza by national reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas:

Question: Dr. Barghouti, I wanted to ask you first of all about the Palestinian Legislative Council. It reportedly met for the first time in a long time on the 5th of June, last Thursday and welcomed the initiative of President Abbas…

Answer (interrupting the question): Not exactly, no. We did not have a meeting of the Legislative Council. And that was not the purpose of the meeting. The meeting took place as a follow-up of a previous meeting which we had had between heads of different groups in the parliament, because we are very worried about the fact that there is a concentration of all the powers in Palestine in the hands of the government – whether in Gaza or in the West Bank, and both governments practically have eliminated the role of the Legislative Council. And what we are seeing is the government practicing legislative authority in addition to executive authority, although its status, legally, is questionable. We gathered to find a way, in a situation where one-third of the members of parliament are in Israeli jails, obstructing the possibility of reconvening the Council, and with the situation of division between the West Bank and Gaza, where both people cannot reach each other. In the situation of this paralysis caused by these factors, we have to find a way to bring back the role of the Legislative Council. And what we decided was to act although informally but effectively: we had a meeting with the participation of a good number of people from different factions, and we decided to create a committee that represents all the groups, including Fatah, Hamas, Mubadara, DFLP, all the people who are in the Council, to regain the supervisory as well as legislative role of the Council.

What we are doing is that, according to the law, each member of the Legislative Council is entitled to practice his duties, even if the Council is not meeting. So what we are doing is, collectively, translating this individual right into action – which means, we will have three major committees and they will start acting next week.

Dr. Barghouthi continued his statement explaining that the moribund PLC had decided to continue to function despite an absence of quorum because 1/3 of its members were in Israeli jails: “One [of these committees] will revise (review) all the legislations that were made by the President on his own, on the recommendation of the Government, and we will express our opinions about it. We will also try to restrain this flow of laws by the President which should not be that much, because he cannot issue a decree unless it is really, really an emergency and urgent, while what is happening is that there is a flow of laws without justification. Second duty will be for a committee that will facilitate the observatory role, the control role of the Council, on the work of the government, including revising the budget and seeing what’s going on. And finally there will be a committee that will continue to look at peoples’ needs and how this can be reflected in the policies.

Practically, we are getting the Palestinian Legislative Council out of the freezer, and we are bringing it back to life, out of necessity, but mainly out of concern that the whole democratic system is jeopardized.

Q: But I understood from you last year that the reason the Council could be frozen – and I thought the reason that it was frozen – was because of President Abbas’ decision to continue the Emergency Government beyond the period stipulated in the Draft Basic Law…

A: No, the reason for its freezing is mainly the fact of Israel’s arresting one-third of the members of parliament. But the second reason is because both Fatah and Hamas could not agree to meet. And if they meet under the situation where one-third of the members are in jail, would that reflect on the voting or not? So, all these were complications. But the main factor that is preventing the council from properly working is the arrest of about 48 members of our council.

Q: The meeting that was held on the 5th of June, and then again yesterday, on the 8th of June, was it just among members in Ramallah? Or, was there a video link with Gaza?

A: No, there was no video link with Gaza, because the people in Gaza are meeting on their own. And that is also questionable. This meeting in Ramallah was the only meeting where all the groups are participating, and not just one party. In Gaza, Hamas people meet alone.

Q: Even though all the parties [who were elected] are participating, you don’t actually have any participation of people from Gaza?

A: But we have participation from Hamas?

Q: I saw a report about a week ago that the Minister of Health in Gaza had asked the Legislative Council – I assumed in Gaza, but maybe it was here in Ramallah – to arrange to have the workers in the Ministry of Health in Gaza, who are being paid their salaries by Ramallah, come back to work because they are needed in the medical institutions in Gaza. Who was he appealing to? Who was he talking to, then?

A: I don’t know. I didn’t receive any appeal from his side. So, I don’t know about it. What I know is that the Legislative Council itself cannot become a reason for division or part of the division. It should try to be part of unity efforts. And that’s what we are trying to do. What I know is that we have two governments, in West Bank and in Gaza, and both are illegal. What I know is that the meetings in Gaza that are taking place are not consistent with the law. The difference between the meetings we’re having in Ramallah and the meetings in Gaza is that in Ramallah we are not claiming that we’re meeting as Legislative Council. We’re meeting as members of the Legislative Council, trying to make some effort to save the democratic structure, to prevent the collapse of the democratic structure, to prevent the situation where all the principle of separation of authority is vanishing because of this situation, this unusual situation.

Q: Is there any thought of linking up with the Legislative Council members in Gaza?

A: We could do that, we could do that – if they agree on the method that we are using now, yes, why not? The day before yesterday we spoke with the President of the Council in Gaza, Mr. Ahmad Bahr, who’s acting President, actually. And we are discussing. They have some ideas about how to regain the role of the Council. We’ll see. This is part of the national dialog about regaining the unity. But that is possible.

Q: The revival of the meetings of the members of the Legislative Council here coincides with the announcement last week by President Abbas…

A (interrupting the question): No, it started before. You have to remember that we started this effort three months ago, when we initiated a committee on our own to investigate the death of Majd al-Barghouthi, in Ramallah prison. After that, we also initiated another committee to investigate the death of Abu Khattar (sp???) from Gaza. In both cases, we acted on our own. We have the right to do so. We appointed a committee to investigate both cases. The first committee finished its job and presented a very important report that was published, about the torture in prisons that should stop. And now the second committee is finishing its work, and hopefully within one week it will be out. So the efforts to start to reactivate the Palestinian Legislative Council started a long time before the new initiative of the President, and it’s independent of it.

Q: Is the investigation into the death of Abu Khattar (sp???) in Gaza, is that being done in coordination with people in Gaza? With people in the Legislative Council in Gaza?

A: Yes, and with the government there. They both are cooperative.

Q. And the results of the investigation into the death of Majd al-Barghouti, here, show that he was tortured in prison, and you asked for improvements…

A: We asked the President to issue immediate decrees, or immediate orders, to suspend any form of torture in prisons, which he promised to do. We asked him to present to the courts, or present to justice, anybody who participated, covered up, or initiated, or ordered acts of torture – and we also reported that the autopsy report that was presented to us was inconsistent with professional approach, and that they have to make some actions in this regard in order to make sure that the autopsy structure, which is under the government, should function in a professional way. And the report was published, and it received very good appreciation, I think. The question is, how far were the recommendations that were made, implemented? We are not sure yet – we have to examine that.

Q: You said that the main reason for the members of the Legislative Council deciding to meet was to counter the flood of legislation that is being made by the Executive. Does the Executive appreciate your initiative?

A: When we first met with the President, we demanded that no new decrees would be issued without us first reviewing them, and we demanded to review the already-issued legislation. Because, anyhow, all existing laws that were issued as decrees by the President would have to be revised (reviewed) by the Council the moment it meets. And the Council could dismiss these decrees, if it wants, or change them. So, he promised that he will convene us when any new decree is being prepared. This did not happen. That’s why we are meeting now, and initiating the new committee, which will make sure that what we agreed about with the President will be implemented.

Q: Could you explain what you think the status is of the government in Ramallah and of the government in Gaza? And why are they illegal?

A: If we follow the basic law strictly, both of them are illegal, because neither of them have the approval of the Legislative Council. One of them was dismissed by the President, which is his right – I mean the government which is now acting in Gaza – so it shouldn’t exist. The other one in Ramallah was initiated as an Emergency Government, but the right to have that Emergency Government is limited only to one month – but it exceeded one month, and it’s lasted almost one year now. So, in both cases, there is a legal problem, and there is a strange reality. Of course Israel carries a big share in that, by destroying the democratic system here. But we cannot say that it is Israel only – it’s also the Palestinian division, internally, especially the behavior of Fatah and Hamas. The behavior of both of them has violated the rule of law, it’s violated democratic principles, and it is quite factional. That’s why what we see here is an effort from the Legislative Council, with the participation of members from all parties, to prevent a deterioration to the level that Palestine, again, becomes an autocracy, instead of sustaining or keeping what we have achieved of a democratic system, in anticipation that, hopefully, sometime soon we will be able to go to elections again. We don’t want the system to be destroyed in the process of division. That’s why we are doing what we are doing today. But what we say is that executive authority, executive government cannot continue to function without control (checks and balances), cannot take on itself the responsibility of legislation, and substitute itself for the Legislative Council, and cannot continue to act without being accountable to the Legislative Council.

Q: What would it take for the Legislative Council to meet again?

A: A majority (a quorum) of votes. We need a meeting where there is a majority of votes. The President should call for that meeting. There should be a majority of votes. And during that meeting there should be elections for the new presidium of that Council. The problem is that you cannot get a majority of votes because Hamas lost its majority, due to the fact that many of their members are in jail. Fatah does not have a majority alone. So, neither of them can convene, alone, the Council — you see? And we, the independents would not go to any Council that is not unified, anyhow. So, that is the problem – the absence of majority. If Fatah comes, Hamas does not come. If Hamas comes, Fatah does not come. What we need is an agreement. Of course, if the people are out of jail, Hamas automatically have a majority, and then the Council can meet. But, the fact that one-third of Hamas (parliamentary) members are in jail is preventing the normal procedure, and requires an agreement between the two factions to have the Council meet. That is why it is not able to meet.

Q: Once it does meet, what impact would that have on the legitimacy of the current government in Ramallah?

A: It depends on what the members of the Council want. They can dismiss it, automatically. Immediately after the Legislative Council meets, it has the right to dismiss or accept or approve the Government.

Q: And what impact do you think it might have on the government in Gaza?

A: The same, the same. I mean, the government in Gaza cannot act, legally speaking, as a caretaker government because it was dismissed. That’s why I did not stay as a Minister of Information [of the National Unity Government], because I think I was dismissed. I can’t stay in that position. Some others are continuing to function in Gaza, because there is a new arrangement. But in both cases there is violation of the Basic Law. And the cause of that is the division between Fatah and Hamas.

Q: What do you think is going on in Gaza, now – and my question includes the attacks on the crossings from Gaza, the attacks on Israel ….

A: What you see in Gaza is a terrible situation of humanitarian crisis which is unprecedented, where people are stuck in practically a jail, with 1.4 million people living in less than 360 square kilometers, with lack of supply of everything – food, oil, medicines, everything. It’s a disaster. More than 120 people have died already because of this situation. And what we need is lifting the siege. The military actions that take place from time to time, which are sporadic, can be immediately finished if Israel accepts the several offers that were made for complete cease-fire. Up till now, the Palestinians have made the offer and the Israelis are not responding. This is what’s happening.

Q: There are reports, and analysis, that the attacks are being made in order to provoke an Israeli military attack on Gaza.

A: No, I think Israel is not responding to the offers for a cease-fire, because it is preparing a military attack on Gaza, and it seeks reasons or excuses for conducting such a huge military attack which could lead to a disaster.

Q: It also looks as though if Israel does nothing – but continues the siege – it almost accomplishes the same objective, by allowing the situation to continue …

A: No, Israel can do something better than these two options, which is to accept cease-fire.

Q: And the various initiatives to bring about Fatah-Hamas rapprochement – I don’t know, Senegal, and Cairo, and Damascus and I don’t know what – these efforts to reestablish Palestinian unity, do you think any of them are serious, and could be productive?

A: We still don’t know. It’s early to say. But we welcome the initiatives, we welcome any efforts to end this internal conflict. We think that Palestinians, united, are better partners in every aspect, including for making real peace in this region. And that’s why we will not stop working as hard as we can to regain Palestinian unity, and not only regain Palestinian unity but regain Palestinian democracy. At the end of the day, when we get to the point of unifying everything together, immediately we will have to go to elections, because people have the right to choose, and we have to accept the democratic opinion of the people. So, I think the new developments are promising, the fact that the President made an initiative is useful and very, very encouraging. Hamas responded positively but that‘s not enough. What we need is real dialog that is fast, quick, and productive – and a strong will on both sides to be able to sustain and prevent the effect of external pressures that could be exercised, as has been the case in previous times, to prevent the establishment of national unity again.

Q: In your opinion, was President Abbas’ initiative really an initiative? Because afterwards it was said, oh well, he meant exactly what he meant before, and he meant that the Yemeni initiative should be implemented as understood before, which meant that as a precondition the Hamas takeover of Gaza has to be rescinded …

A: It doesn’t matter what you call it, it matters that before he was saying ‘You retreat first, and then I’ll have dialog’, while now he said ‘I’m ready to have dialog’. That’s a change.

Q: But it is being said that he did mean (to say to Hamas): ‘You have to retreat first’ …

A: There are different explanations. I will not accept explanations from people around him. I want explanations only from him. And from him, what we heard is an opening, a serious opening, positive opening for dialog.

Q: And the elections – are you talking about new Legislative Council elections, or new Presidential elections?

A. Both. When we speak about elections, we speak about both – Presidential, and Legislative Council elections.

Q: There are reports that Fatah will support Mahmoud Abbas again as it’s (presidential) candidate…

A: They have the right to choose whoever they want … President Abbas has the right to two terms.

As part of the Annapolis process, a big investment conference is to be held later this month. It was clearly expected that the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations were to be well advanced by this stage – but they are not. So, the conference will be taking place in a surreal landscape, where there are daily – and nightly – incursions into Bethlehem by Israeli Defense Forces and Israeli security services, almost always ending with arrests, sometimes with deaths. Bethlehem’s governor, the legendary Fatah commander Salah Ta’amri, this is like a scene from a Chekov play, yet, he says, the conference should go on.

Yet, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice is now making a major push to boost attendance at this Palestine Investment Conference, and announced that she will be sending a delegation co-headed by private U.S. investors including Palestinian Americans, and a senior U.S. State Department Official.

But, a recent World Bank paper destined for donor nations meeting in London this week said that “While the PA (Palestinian Authority) has moved ahead with its economic reforms, albeit slowly, there has been little progress on relaxing movement and access constraints”. The report said that the impact of these restrictions, including hundreds of checkpoints and roadblocks in the West Bank, “cannot be overestimated”, Reuters reported. So, the $7.7 billion pledged by donors in December may not have the intended effect, without major change.

In this interview, Ta’amri reflects on the upcoming investment conference, on the current situation, and on the past and the near future.

************************

Question: How are preparations going for the Palestine Investment Conference that will be held in Bethlehem from 21-23 May?

Answer: Many people have their doubts about the conference, because of the closure, because of the Israeli measures, because of the lack of mobility for the Palestinians, because of The Wall. So, many Palestinians have their doubts about the possibilities of success of such a conference.

I believe it’s good to have this conference. I think it reflects support for the Palestinian people, political support. There is, there could be an opportunity for some investors, Palestinian investors. But the least I expect from this conference is, as I said to the local committee for the conference in Bethlehem yesterday, we’ll assume that two families want their son and daughter to get married in Bethlehem, and they booked every room in every hotel in Bethlehem. That is good.

Of course, we don’t have very high expectations from such a conference, again, not because there are no fields for investment – in fact, there are many fields for investment – but because of the Israeli measures. Even you as a reporter have difficulties in movement. That makes you imagine the difficulties Palestinians go through, whenever they move from one town to another.

So, I hope the conference will convene. I hope some cooperation between non-Palestinian investors and Palestinian investors takes place. Most of the guests or the investors who are coming from abroad, most of them are Palestinians, living abroad, and some Arabs, whether from the Gulf or from the States, or Latin America, or Europe. I think that is good. I think that is good. It is badly needed at this time of duress.

Q: Do you know who is coming?

A: So far, we haven’t verified the list. Over 350 guests are coming, so far. So far.

Q: Will it just be a conference of businessmen, or will there be political officials as well?

A: No, it’s business.

Q: And, are there specific investment opportunities that will be offered to them?

A: Yes, I think there are investments [investment proposals] for about $1.8 billion, almost $2 billion dollars.

Q: Are these Tony Blair’s proposals, these investment proposals?

A: No, the proposals came from the private sector, mainly the private sector, mainly the private sector. So far, in Bethlehem itself we have two major investment areas – cloth making and stone factories, and the handcrafts for Christmas. And, of course, tourism is the main investment when we talk about Bethlehem. But, although it will be convened in Bethlehem, it’s for the whole of Palestine.

Q: Do you have a breakdown?

A: No, it all depends. It depends on how things go during the conference, who connects with whom. It all depends also on the PR work of every investor. We’ll help them comment. They will know about every investor, whether those who came from abroad, or the local investors, they will know about each other, they can connect, they can plan together. But it’s mainly the private sector.

Q: Have you had contact with the Palestinians who are coming abroad for this meeting?

A: Yes, of course.

Q: Why would they come now, if they haven’t been willing to invest before?

A. To tell you the truth, many of them were very enthusiastic to come over the past 12 years and invest here, especially in Bethlehem 2000. But, the deterioration in the political situation made them refrain, and many of them had to leave. Again, it’s the Israeli measures, it’s the political situation that reflects itself on the economy, the lack of progress on the political track, all those are elements that hinder and sabotage any plans for major investment in Palestine.

Q: Are there going to be any guarantees for these investments, risk guarantees?

A: Well, I have no idea. With all honesty, regarding the Palestinians yes, if you talk about the law, yes, investments are guaranteed, are protected by the law. But, again, the freedom of mobility is not in the hands of the Authority, it’s in the hands of the Israelis. The borders are in the hands of the Israelis. So, we cannot give guarantees of freedom of mobility. It’s in the hands of the Israelis. And even the progress at the political level, it’s in the hands of the Israelis.

Q: Even the special measures that are being adopted for this conference, to facilitate the passage of the guests – do you thing they’ll be sufficient to make people comfortable, are they going to be driven around in buses, escorted by Israeli military jeeps with flashing lights? Are they going to have to take everything out of their suitcases when they come across Allenby Bridge?

A: Well, it all depends on the Israelis, I told you. I have no idea. They say they will make it easy, etc., the same way they said about roadblocks. They said they removed many roadblocks. In fact, from what we see in Bethlehem, no roadblocks were removed. We still are delayed at the main roadblock on the back road (Wadi Nar) between Bethlehem and Ramallah. And we see roadblocks everywhere around Bethlehem. And The Wall is still creeping on. So, they promised to make things easy – that’s what Dr. Abu Libdeh told me. But so far we haven’t seen any changes on the ground.

Q: Did they tell you what specific measures they were going to use to make things easy?
Did they make anything clear?

A: So far, no. I don’t have contacts with the Israelis, so I depend on what my colleagues tell me.

Q: Even for this conference, you don’t have contacts with them?

A: No. I don’t have contacts with them.

Q: Is it your choice?

A: It happened that way. In the past I had contacts with them. When I was in a prison camp, I was the main negotiator; I had contacts with them when I negotiated the departure of the deportees from the Church of the Nativity. I met with many Israeli officials when I was in the Legislative Council, at their request. But as a Governor, no, I don’t have contacts with them. There is a liaison officer (on the Palestinian side) who’s in charge of contacts with them.

Q: Is it a satisfactory arrangement, do you think?

A: Well, I mean, as long as it is implemented, it will be satisfactory, I think. But, will it be implemented or not? We have to wait and see.

Q: When Tony Blair stayed overnight in Bethlehem, he was actually right by The Wall, by the main checkpoint – just in case. But, that same night, there were Israeli arrests of citizens…

A: Oh, the incursions are every night. Every day there are Israeli incursions in Bethlehem.

Q: It’s actually a little bit bizarre, because the hotel people and everybody involved in the tourism sector is ecstatic that all the rooms in Bethlehem are actually full now and have been, and yet at the same time these incursions are going on now while the tourists are – what, ignoring them? I don’t understand…

A: [Laughing]. It is the surreal theater. It’s one of Chekov’s plays. We Palestinians are used to working / walking on a tightrope.

Q: Is it something you think the tourists should just be ignoring?

A: Sometimes, we have to. Or else we’ll go bananas. At some point, you need to ignore the occupation. Just ignore them, as if they are non-existent! If we don’t do that, we will not move forward, we will not even leave our homes. We will not even leave our bedrooms, even. We breathe danger. We drink in danger. We walk in danger, surrounded by danger. We plan for our future when there is a siege or a blockade, or a curfew – we have to do so. We have to ignore them. And we do.

************************

Q: How do you feel about the present state of negotiations?

A: I did not negotiate, so I don’t know. But, from the statements of both sides, I don’t see any progress. They say there is no progress. So…

Q: They also say, oh, it’s secret, we’re not telling the journalists, and we’re not making it public – but there’s really progress behind closed doors.

A: Well, I’m not a journalist. I’m one of the leading figures in the Authority, and in Fateh, and the PLO, and I know there is no progress. They speak about reaching an agreement before the end of President Bush’s term, but I don’t see how, I don’t see how.

Q: What is the President [Abbas] doing, then?

A: He is doing the impossible, trying to make a breakthrough in the situation. He cannot, he doesn’t have the luxury of giving in to despair. I think he will give it some time before he stops to reassess the situation and take a stand, whether to go on or to say goodbye to negotiations or to go to the international community and ask them to come and take over. Things are not moving anywhere.

Q: Is President Abbas making the decisions himself, or is there, does he have a group of close advisers…

A: No, we have the Council of the PLO, the Central and the National Council of the PLO. He has the advisers. He has Fateh with all the hierarchies of Fatah. So, no, he doesn’t work in isolation.

Q: So, even in the negotiations, every decision he will have to take …

A: Of course, he cannot take decisions by himself. Abu Alaa’ is a member of the Central Committee of Fatah, and he was the speaker of the Legislative Council, he is the main figure in the Fatah organization and mobilization, and he is the chief negotiator. So there’s a group of very intelligent, very capable, people with the President.

************************

Q: Why did you not meet Jimmy Carter when he was here? Why didn’t he come to Bethlehem?

A: [Laughing] Maybe he’s not a believer, to come to the Church of the Nativity. I don’t know. You’d better ask him. He didn’t come to Bethlehem…maybe he doesn’t go to Church. Does he? I thought he was religious. I think he’s religious. I like him. I think I met him during the first elections, when I ran for the Legislative Council…no, it was his daughter who came to Bethlehem. I like Carter. He represents the American people the way the American people think themselves to be, which they are not.

Q: What did you make of his meetings with Hamas?

A: Well, that was his own business, I mean. He’s free to meet with whoever he wants to meet with. And his intentions were good, and the man should be judged by his intentions and motives, and his intentions were good and honorable.

Q: Do you have any word of what happening in Cairo in the negotiations among the Palestinian factions and Egypt about a cease-fire?

A: To tell you the truth, I didn’t pay it much attention.

Q: Do you think it’s hopeless?

A. Not hopeless, I think it’s sometimes it’s … there are so many words but no deeds, and many of the statements do not reflect genuine thinking or genuine intentions. I mean, to say that we need, to reach a truce is very important. It will help our people in Gaza, it will ease up things for them. It’s unfair to make our people in Gaza go through what they are going through. And, if the Egyptians manage to reach an agreement of reconciliation between Hamas and the Israelis, that would be good…The situation in Gaza is tragic, and it will explode sooner or later.

Q: It may explode sooner – the situation with the fuel is terrible…

A: The fuel and everything. You know, everybody in the world is complaining about the increase in prices of bread, wheat, fuel, etc., without being under siege. So, you can imagine how things are in Gaza.

Q: Hamas, according to Reuters, is asking the Association of Petroleum station owners to release the fuel stored in Nahal Oz, but they are refusing because the quantities are not sufficient, and it gives them security problems at their gas stations that nobody protects them from. And, in Ramallah, Mojahad Salama said yesterday that Hamas took fuel from the Palestinian Authority depot…it’s completely chaotic.

A: Yeah, well, Hamas is politically-motivated in Gaza, and I don’t think it’s in their interest to allow fuel to come into Gaza. I think they are mobilizing the people in Gaza.
[Interruption for a phone call]

I’m reflecting my own views. I think this dialog between Fatah and Hamas, and between others and Hamas, I think it’s a dialog between the deaf. I believe the practical solution is elections. If Hamas wins again, that means this is the will of our people. Let them take over. Fatah can turn into the opposition. I hope in the next elections, the result would be more balanced, not like the one which Hamas won by a large majority. Hamas didn’t really … Hamas spoke about reform more than they spoke about resistance. Many Fatah people went for Hamas in the elections, as if they are taking revenge at themselves, at Fatah, at the Authority. They wanted reform. It’s not true that they adopted Hamas’s strategy of suicide bombings, and escalation in the military field. In brief, in my view, the last elections reflected the mood of the Palestinian people at a certain moment, and not the will of the Palestinian people. The Palestinian people were in a certain mood, they elected Hamas, now I hope it’s different. We need a more balanced Legislative Council.

Q: Are the next elections going to be for the next president, or for the Legislative Council?

A: Both, it should be for both, at the same time. I don’t think there would be a break-through in the relations, a positive breakthrough in the relations between Fatah and Hamas before the elections.

Q: Will Mahmoud Abbas run again?

A: I don’t really know. That’s premature to tell.

Q: His term was supposed to end in 2009, at the beginning of 2009, and now there are reports that he either has already, or is considering, extending it by one year, until 2010…

A. That’s new. It could be. I am reflecting my own views. My own view, my own conviction: this is a dialog between the deaf. My own conviction: we need to drag ourselves without losing hope until we reach the time of the elections, new elections.

Q: What was interesting in Jimmy Carter’s summary of his trip was that he said he added to the agreements he got from Hamas a statement saying they would accept a peace deal that was approved by an elected government, as an alternative to ratification through a referendum. His OpEd in the New York Times this week seemed to suggest that Hamas meant even a new elected government, not going back to the now-disbanded National Unity Government.

A: Well, no government can be elected. Governments are not elected, governments are appointed. It is the Legislative Council that is elected. Anyway, I believe any agreement with Israel needs the people’s support. And, I don’t think Hamas accepts that; they don’t want that. Anyway, the situation is complex. It is in Israel’s favor. This split between Gaza and the West Bank is in Israel’s favor. Hamas will not give up their power in Gaza. It seems that it is true, they want to represent an Islamic model for the world. I hope that will not be the case. Hamas turned its back to our heritage, national heritage. That was a big mistake.

Q: What part of the national heritage did they turn their back on?

A: We are Palestinian Arabs. We are a national movement who did not become part of any regional alliance. We were not part of these conflicts, we were the mediators. And it was one of Arafat’s merits that he did not take sides, he was a mediator. He was a mediator between Algiers and Morocco, between Libya and Egypt, between at some point Syria and Iraq, and at some time between Iraq and Iran, between Yemen and Saudi Arabia. But Hamas launched us into the middle of a regional conflict, andsided with Iran. That means we lost our ability to be mediators. That means our issue was brought back to square number one. And they turned their back to all the agreement which were endorsed by the international community. It was not easy for us to be accepted by the international community. I remember the time when we were boycotted, even as students. And to become members of the United Nations, and to attend the General Assembly in the United Nations, to have more countries recognizing the PLO than Israel – that didn’t come without a price, that didn’t come without hard work on our part. Hamas can’t turn its back on this, and Hamas should build on what we have achieved.

************************

Q: What about the plans for the Fatah Seventh General Conference?

A: Sixth, you mean. I hope it will come soon.

Q: What’s the problem? It was supposed to have been held already…

A: Yeah, because we have to bring thousands of cadres in one place from all over the world, from Australia to Canada, from India to China to Europe to Africa, from everywhere we have to bring our central cadres.

Q: Where will it be held, then?

A: Well, that is to be decided. It’s not easy. In the past we convened in Syria…yes, and it was not easy. It needs protection. I mean, you have all the leading cadres in one place. That is not easy. That is dangerous.

Q: What do you think is the safe place to hold it?

A: We need to look for the safe formula. Then, the safe place.

Q: Is it being held up though, more for political disagreements about who will succeed whom, who will be elected, this reported disputed between the Old Guard and the Young…

A: That could be in the minds of some people. I belong to the Old Guard. But I want the conference convened. I’m keen to see younger leaders taking over. But that doesn’t mean every Old Guard has the same way of thinking. Nor every Young Guard has the same way of thinking. You will find different people with different views, with different motives. But on the whole, I think it will be convened. We had a very important conference in Bethlehem less than a month ago, when the district elected their own leading body. Something like 1,500 members convened. And it was free elections. They elected from the smallest framework to the largest, at the level of the district.

Q: Was there any change in the composition of the bodies?

A: Yes, yes, yes, yes.

Q: In what direction?

A: The old leading body, none of them came to the new leading body. Nobody came. And there are more women, which is good. There is a deeper representation of the community than before.

Q: Meaning?

A: I mean, the people from the villages could win, as well as people from the refugee camps, from Christians as well as from Muslims, which was good. And it was absolutely free, no intervention.

Q: And do these newly-elected younger members all have similar views, or are they very different from each other, and will have to find a common ground …

A: They are different. They are different. They are different from each other, they are different from [us]… Every generation has its own language. It applies to you, it applies to us, it applies to humanity. Every generation has its own language. Our generation had its own language. We loved poetry. We loved music. This generation, they talk computers. They breath computers, internet, etc. So it’s different, absolutely. They are different. Their minds are colder than our minds. We are more emotional. Our generation is more emotional than the new generation. We are more on the side of romanticism than the new generation. To us, 1 + 1 = 11. To them, , 1 + 1 = 2. Sometimes I feel that is the difference.

Q: In this new group that’s been elected, is there any difference between those who stayed here, and those who were on the outside and came back with Arafat?

A: No, I don’t think so. The only difference is in the collective memory. That’s all.
It is the collective memory that is different, that’s why it should be one of our objects to unify the memory, to create bridges between the collective memories of the Palestinians in the diaspora. The collective memory of Lebanon is different from the collective memory of the West Bank. The West Bank is different from Gaza, different from Syria, from Kuwait, etc. That’s the only difference – the collective memory.

Q: How do you think bridges can be built between these collective memories? Really, people here don’t know what you when through outside, they don’t know.

A: Well, by time they will know. By time, it will become part of our heritage.

Q: Do you have any regrets?

A: [Pause] Well, not deep regrets. I regret I smoked for 35 years.

Q: Have you stopped?

A: Oh, yes, six years ago. On small things, I have my own regrets, on small things. But not on major things in my life.

Q: And in terms of the movement, the Fatah movement, the Palestinian movement?

A: No, no, no, I have no regrets. I joined it when I was a kid, and I have no regrets. But on minor things, yes, I have regrets.

************************

Q: Can I ask one last question? I know it’s a difficult one, and I’ve lost friends because of discussions of this very issue. But, when the matter was raised, before the Annapolis Conference, about the recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, the Palestinian reaction was so negative. I don’t understand…

A: Because it’s not a Jewish state, because there are non-Jews in it. And they are not a small minority.

Q: But for the people who feel insecure…

A: We are not going to respond to the Jewish paranoia. Every time they are paranoid about something, we have to cut our noses to please them. If they are paranoid, they’d better do something about it.

Q: But it doesn’t cost anything…

A: No, it does, to us it does.

Q: It doesn’t mean that the refugees can’t return. It doesn’t mean that the Arab citizens of Israel will be expelled…

A: Well, they cannot even talk about return.

Q. But if they feel deeply insecure about this …

A. That’s not our problem! No. That doesn’t show any kind of recognition of the Palestinian people’s rights by the Israelis. I mean, first of all, we pay the price for a crime that was not ours. We did not invent Nazism. Nazism was the invention of Europe, Christian Europe. And if Nazism won, we would have been second on the list to be uprooted, and terminated. We paid the price, the international community paid the price, not only the Jews. And that was not our invention. It was a European invention. Why should we pay the price for that?

Q: Because now, you have to live with them.

A: Yes, because we have to live with them, they have to accept the fact that, no, Israel is not a Jewish state, because when you say a Jewish state, that means tomorrow, yeah, go out! Leave! You will recognize us as a Jewish state, we do not want non-Jews amongst us.

Q: Maybe it doesn’t mean that …

A: Maybe it does.

Q: Can’t you ask for guarantees? Even international guarantees?

A: Well, we are not going to get any guarantees better than the guarantees – the mother and the four kids who were killed a couple of days ago, and the many Palestinian children who were killed, and the 12,000 prisoners who are in jail. No, I think the Israelis should deal with their paranoia, I think the world should also deal with their sensitivity and cowardice when it comes to Israel. Why should Israel get away with whatever they do?

We don’t hate the Jews. We hate occupation. It’s not my mistake, it’s not my fault that the occupiers are Jewish. We hate occupation. The minute they become non-occupiers, then we are not going to hate them. So, I believe this is a very sensitive issue to the Palestinians. We have our own insecurities. And this year we are celebrating 60 years of Nakbah. It started yesterday, and I don’t think Palestinians will forget their country, will forget their villages, the 380 villages which were uprooted, and disappeared from the face of the earth, for somebody coming from Poland living there.

They have the right to be afraid, they have the right…[No]. Their security lies in their positive and peaceful coexistence with us.

The saying goes: “We are doomed to be together”. We can turn it into: We are blessed to live together. It all depends on how do we educate ourselves, how do we accept each other.

But, coexistence as occupier and under occupation, like slaves and masters, it doesn’t go, it doesn’t work. Living under occupation is a form of slavery. And we cannot be, we don’t accept to be slaves forever. It’s whether we become free or not free. There’s no half-way between slavery and non-slavery.

To us, peace means freedom.

************************

In an interview with Bernard Gwertzman, CFR’s Consulting Editor, published on 7 March, Siegman spoke about the really sensational Vanity Fair article published last week. Interesting, too, that although he says the policy was clear to all who wished to know, he does NOT say, dismissively, (as some journalistic colleagues have) “oh, nothing new”:

“Q (Gwertzman): Do you buy into this view that is in a new Vanity Fair article that the United States planned, in cooperation with Fatah, to cause a coup in Gaza and throw out Hamas, and that backfired, leading to the current split between Fatah and Hamas?

A (Siegman): One does not need an investigative article to make that point to know it is true. The U.S. government made no secret whatsoever from the beginning that it intended to arm Abbas’s security forces, appoint an American general to be in charge of that program, and provide finances for training, equipment, and the arming of these people. They said publicly the purpose of this project would be for these people to have a showdown with Hamas and to oust them from the government. So, this was never a secret. This was always in the public domain.

Q: I never saw that— that they were so blatant to say they wanted Fatah to oust Hamas.

A: Yes, they were precisely that blatant. What happened next is that under the direction of Mohammed Dahlan, who was Abbas’s national security adviser, the Fatah militias in Gaza were instructed to attack Hamas forces and to create a sufficient level of anarchy that would allow Abbas’s security forces to come in and to say they have to restore order and take over the government in Gaza. This never was a secret. In any event, the Vanity Fair article pretty much nails down the story.

Q: When was this decision taken?

The decision, according to the article, was taken immediately after the election in January 2006. As the Vanity Fair story tells it, the State Department people and the White House were in a state of total shock when the election results came in. Hamas was overwhelmingly elected and Fatah was ousted. Incidentally, at this time, Hamas itself was still observing a self-declared cease-fire. They were not sending in missiles or engaging in violence against Israel. I mention this because a lot of people are under the impression that this decision to overthrow Hamas is somehow related to Hamas’ violence. That is simply not true. At the time this decision was taken, there was a cease-fire that Hamas had observed for a year and a half”… The CFR interview with Henry Siegman is published here .

Haaretz added that Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said about Abbas’ speech that “It is full of incitement and words calling for divisions … There is no new initiative or practical step in this speech that can pave the road to start an immediate dialogue.”

The Haaretz report on Abbas’ speech on the occasion of the 1 January anniversary of the founding of Fatah is here.

YNet reported that “Abbas also took a newly conciliatory tone toward his Hamas rivals, calling for a ”new page’ in relations between the bitter enemies. ‘There is no way for any party here to be an alternative to the other, and there is no room for terms like coup or military takeover, but only for dialogue, dialogue, dialogue’, Abbas said, referring to the Islamic militant Hamas’ violent rout of his Fatah forces and takeover of the Gaza Strip in June. Abbas maintained his position that Hamas must restore power in Gaza to an elected government. But he urged reconciliation and called for new elections in an effort to end the suffering the Palestinian people have endured as a result of the takeover. ‘I renew my offer for early elections here, as a way out of the hell that was imposed on us’, Abbas said Monday”… The YNet report is here.

Haaretz later posted an updated story reporting that “Israel has been limiting its operations in the West Bank, ruled by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, as it negotiates a peace agreement with Abbas’s moderate government … Late Thursday, the Israeli military sent a team into a suburb of Ramallah, the seat of Abbas’ government, to arrest one of Qureia’s bodyguards, a member of the Palestinian security forces who the military said was implicated in armed activity against Israel and had provided weapons to other militants. ‘He opened fire at troops and they fired back, killing him’, the IDF said. Palestinian security officials denied that the bodyguard, 23-year-old Mu’tasem Sharif fired at troops … The raid went ahead despite Israel’s decision to largely stop pursuing members of Abbas’ Fatah movement, which Israel is seeking to strengthen against its rivals, the Islamic militants of Hamas”. This Haaretz story is posted here.

The Palestinian independent news agency Ma’an reported that “Undercover Israeli forces killed a body guard assigned to protect the head of the Palestinian negotiating team, former Prime Minister Ahmad Qurei, in the West Bank town of Beituniya, near Ramallah on Friday morning. Medical sources confirmed that the victim was twenty-three-year-old Mu’tasim Ash-Sharif, an officer in the Palestinian Presidential Guards, the elite 17 Forces and one of Qurei’s personal guards. Witnesses said the undercover Israeli soldiers stormed Ash-Sharif’s house in Beituniya and shot him. The witnesses said Ash-Sharif did not resist his attackers. Ash-Sharif died in an ambulance en route to the government hospital in Ramallah. Ash-Sharif was not considered ‘wanted’ by Israel”…

Qureia later reportedly condemned the killing — though rather coolly. AP reported that “Qureia, a former Palestinian prime minister, condemned the operation. Israel is trying to hinder progress in talks ‘by doing the opposite of its commitments and pledges to the international community, the most dangerous of which is the continuous assassinations of Palestinian fighters’, he said in a statement Friday”. This AP report is published here.

Before the killing, Ma’an News Agency reported that “Qurei told the Palestinian Al-Ayyam newspaper that negotiations have become possible after Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert pledged to stick to the Road Map peace plan during a meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Thursday. Olmert pledged not to undermine the peace process, but stopped short of promising a complete halt on expansion of illegal West Bank settlements. New construction at the Jabal Abu Ghnaim settlement, known as Har Homa in Israel, near Bethlehem, has threatened to derail the negotiation. Qurei said the Israeli pledges were satisfactory to the Palestinians. He also said that Israel promised to consider reopening the closed Palestinian institutions in Jerusalem gradually. Abbas and Olmert tackled the issue of changing the Israeli standards for the release Palestinian prisoners, Qurei said”. Ma’an reported that Qureia said Israel pledged that it would reexamine rules that prohibit the release of certain prisoners, including those who Israel says have “blood on their hands”.

Hours later, it was announced that Israel had agreed to release 50 armored vehicles donated by Russia to be delivered to Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas. However, Israel will not permit gun turrets to be mounted on the armored vehicles. Palestinian Information Minister and acting Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki said that the Palestinians would take the armored vehicles without mounted guns for the moment, and pursue the matter at some more appropriate time in the future.

Al-Jazeera is reporting over 100 wounded on its English-language website, with more casualties during funerals for the victims in Gaza on Monday.

The Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority, headed by Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, has declared three days of mourning.

Here is how the event was reported, first in Ramallah, then in Gaza, now controlled by Hamas since it took over control from Fatah security forces in mid-June. The reports were collected by the BBC Monitoring Service.

Palestinian Killed in Arafat Death Anniversary Ceremony Clashes
BBC Monitoring Newsfile
November 12, 2007

PNA Presidency-controlled Ramallah Palestine Satellite Channel Television in Arabic at 1100 gmt broadcasts live images from Fatah’s central ceremony, commemorating the third anniversary of the death of late President Yasir Arafat. Shots are heard and the crowd is seen running away from the site. The television carries a breaking news screen caption saying: “Hamas militias are attacking the central ceremony from Islamic University’s rooftop.”

In the meantime, the Hamas-run Al-Aqsa Satellite Television in Arabic at 1115 gmt carries a breaking news screen caption saying: “Fatah members are attacking institutions and police centres following the Fatah ceremony in Gaza City.” It is followed by another breaking news screen caption, reading: “Interior Ministry monitors eight violations by the participants in the Fatah ceremony. Citizen killed by Fatah gunmen in Gaza.”

The BBC Monitoring Service report is here.

Al Jazeera is reporting Tuesday that “Witnesses said the shooting broke out as crowds of Fatah supporters threw rocks at Hamas security forces and chanted ‘Shia, Shia’, accusing them of serving the interests of Iran. Mohammed Dahlan, Fatah’s former security chief in Gaza, said Hamas’s harsh response was a sign its grip on Gaza is weakening. ‘What is happening in Gaza today is the beginning of the end of Hamas on the popular, religious and moral level’, he told Palestine TV. Hamas said Monday’s events were an attempt to exploit Arafat’s memory in order to ’cause chaos and confront Hamas’.”
Al Jazeera’s English-language website’s report is here.

The Associated Press has reported from Gaza City that “The images of Hamas policemen facing off against large groups of rock-throwers challenged Hamas’ claim that it has established tight control … [As the crowd was beginning to leave the rally] Fatah stone-throwers clashed with armed Hamas policemen. ‘It was a big mess, and everyone was running for cover’, said a wounded 24-year-old demonstrator who would give only his first name, Farouk, for fear of repercussions by Hamas. While he lay on the ground waiting for help, he said he saw a man in a wheelchair trying to hide near a wall. In one confrontation, an Associated Press reporter observed about 30 Hamas policemen — some posted on the rooftop of a government ministry, others on the streets below — firing heavily for about 10 minutes. Some appeared to be shooting over the heads of Fatah stone-throwers while others were firing randomly. In another, AP Television News footage showed hundreds of young Fatah activists, some wrapped in yellow flags, facing off against Hamas police in black or blue-camouflage uniforms across an intersection. The Fatah supporters pelted Hamas troops with stones, surging forward even as they were met by heavy bursts of gunfire. One Hamas policeman dropped to one knee for better aim. At one point, a young stone-thrower collapsed and was carried off by others. Elsewhere, AP photographers observed frantic demonstrators commandeering private cars to take the wounded to hospitals. Medical officials said seven civilians were killed and 85 people were wounded. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri held Fatah responsible for the violence, saying Fatah gunmen had been posted on high-rise buildings overlooking the rally to shoot at Hamas police officers as a planned provocation. Hamas said five of its policemen were wounded by sniper fire from the roof of the pro-Fatah Al Azhar University near the rally. ‘If Hamas was planning today’s incidents, why would we have allowed the rally to take place?’ Abu Zuhri told a news conference. Fatah denied the charge, saying no armed men were allowed at the rally. An AP reporter saw 10 Fatah gunmen being turned away at the start of the rally. Medical officials said none of the dead was a Hamas policeman. After nightfall, Hamas forces arrested 27 Fatah activists involved in planning the rally, Fatah officials said. They also confiscated computers and documents from a Fatah media office. Tens of thousands of Fatah supporters still draw a monthly salary from Abbas’ West Bank government … ”
The AP collection of eyewitness accounts is here.

Despite any nuances (witnesses reported yesterday seeing truckloads of Fatah promotional items coming through the Israeli-controlled border crossings, while normal consumer products have been banned for months; the PA still pays the salaries of the Fatah loyalists in Gaza), Hamas is getting the brunt of the blame.

Agence France Presse reported that “The deaths added salt to the wounds of already bitter divisions among Palestinians, with Palestinian prime minister Salam Fayyad blaming top Hamas leaders for the killings. ‘Senior officials in Hamas ordered these crimes which were carried out by the Hamas militia in order to terrify the people… Now their punishment is a national duty’, Fayyad said in a statement from his office. President Abbas on official television denounced ‘these horrible crimes committed by a band of rebels… before the eyes of the entire world’. Earlier, the head of the secular Fatah party’s parliamentary bloc ruled out future talks with the Islamists, who had called for a return to a national unity government that briefly united the factions before the takeover. ‘There will be no dialogue and no discussions with the killers and coup-makers of Hamas’, Azzam Ahmed said in a statement. Hamas blamed Fatah gunmen for instigating the clashes, accusing them of firing down on police from the rooftops around the square. They ‘opened fire on Palestinian police, wounding four of them, then a group within the rally started throwing rocks at police, and the clashes ensued’, Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri said at a press conference. His account was disputed by an AFP correspondent and several witnesses, who said Hamas police opened fire on the demonstration”.
The AFP report of denunciations of Hamas is here.

There is a heavy pall of anger and grief in the air. Ironically, just the day before this violence in Gaza, the Palestinian independent news agency, Ma’an, reported that “Deposed Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh renwed calls for comprehensive dialogue with the rival Fatah party in order to resolve the deep political divisions in Palestinian society on Sunday. In an unprecedented move, Haniyeh suggested Hamas might hand over control of the security forces in the Gaza Strip to the Palestinian Authority”. The Ma’an report on Haniya’s offer to put Gaza’s security forces under direct PA control is here.

It was the worst clash between the two largest Palestinian groups since Hamas routed Fatah in a military take-over of the Gaza Strip in mid-June.

AP reported that “Fatah officials accused Hamas forces of opening fire from the nearby Islamic University.  Hamas said its men had come under attack from Fatah gunmen and shot back”.

AP said in its report that: “The emotional memorial event for Arafat had given Fatah a rare chance to assemble its supporters in the Gaza Strip. Abbas has rejected any renewed dialogue with Hamas until the group relinquishes control of the Gaza Strip. Hamas has banned opposition rallies since its takeover of the territory but any move to prevent a remembrance ceremony for Arafat, the iconic leader who died on November 11, 2004, would have been widely unpopular among Palestinians … WAFA news agency, run by Abbas’s office, accused Hamas of stealing dozens of pictures of Arafat and 30,000 headdresses symbolizing the late leader, that came through an Israeli-run border crossing point earlier in the day. A pro-Hamas Internet site quoted a Hamas security official as saying trucks carrying yellow Fatah flags and hats were seized ‘at a time when the Gaza Strip is being deprived of basic goods and medicine’.” The AP report on the clashes and casualties at a Fatah rally in Gaza city is here

These high-rise apartments were built only after the start of the Oslo Process between Israel and the Palestinian Liberation Organization, which authorized the return of exiled Palestinian fighters from their camps in the deserts of Algeria, Libya, Tunisia, Sudan and elsewhere. These fighters were to serve as the security services of the Palestinian Authority that was set up by the Oslo Accords.

Here, from the Amnesty International report, is the “Testimony of F.H., a mechanic working with the Presidential Guard/Force 17:
‘On Sunday 10 June in the late morning, at about 10.30-11am, I and my colleague, Mohammed Swerki, who worked as a cook, were sent to deliver food to our colleagues who were in the Bacri Tower [a tall residential building in Gaza City]. However, we went to the wrong building by mistake; we went to the nearby Ghifari tower, where there was a Hamas group. When they opened the door downstairs we told them we were from Force 17 and they took us in and tied our hands and blindfolded us and took us upstairs; I don’t know if it was the top floor or one below. I don’t know if they were Qassam Brigades or Executive Force; they were dressed in black and masked. They asked me for names and telephone numbers of officers in Force 17 and which weapons they had and I said I didn’t know; I am a mechanic and my job was to repair cars and Mohammed was a cook; we were not involved in security issues. Then very quickly they left me and went to fight because they were being attacked by Force 17. Me and Mohammed were kept separate. At about 4 or 5 pm I heard screaming and the Hamas group came back to me and told me that Mohammed had fallen off the roof. They gave me water and allowed me to wash and pray. In the meantime some of my relatives had been alerted and there was intervention and someone came to get me and I was allowed to leave. Mohammed’s body was found in the street below the building; his hands were tied and he was blindfolded. He was 26 years old; he was married but did not yet have children’.

[n.b., when this writer was in Gaza last June, she heard that F.H. had been told, and believed, that he too was about to be thrown off the roof of the high-rise apartment building. He reportedly spent a long time in hospital, suffering from shock -- and was unable to speak for many days]

“As the news of Mohammed Swerki’s death spread it was rumoured that he had been thrown off the roof by Hamas gunmen, and masked Fatah gunmen quickly surrounded the home of Dr Ala’ al-Rifati, dean of the business faculty at the Islamic University in Gaza City and abducted his brother, Mohammed al-Rifati, a 35-year-old imam and reported Hamas supporter. He was later found dead, his body riddled with bullets, near the PA security compound in the Ansar area of Gaza City.

“Later that evening masked gunmen abducted Husam Abu Qinas when he was in a shared taxi returning home from work in Khan Yunis. They bundled him into a jeep reportedly belonging to the Presidential Guard/Force 17 and took him to the Mhanna tower (a tall residential building) in Gaza City and threw him off the roof, handcuffed. He had been shot in the head first, but it is not known whether he was still alive when he was thrown from the roof. Husam Abu Qinas, a 35-year-old tiler, married and expecting his first child, was religious but reportedly not a Hamas member. Both attacks were believed to have been carried out in revenge for the killing of Mohammed Swerki.”
The Amnesty International Report on the Hamas-Fatah fighting is published here.